1996-04-13 - Re: questions about bits and bytes

Header Data

From: Doug Hughes <Doug.Hughes@Eng.Auburn.EDU>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 0be66f055463c0fc409dfbe010bb66051c0c94f40ee51833b8fc1ce8618fa2ac
Message ID: <doug-9603121634.AA0247400@netman.eng.auburn.edu>
Reply To: <m0u7Ov4-000903C@pacifier.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-04-13 00:21:17 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 08:21:17 +0800

Raw message

From: Doug Hughes <Doug.Hughes@Eng.Auburn.EDU>
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 08:21:17 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: questions about bits and bytes
In-Reply-To: <m0u7Ov4-000903C@pacifier.com>
Message-ID: <doug-9603121634.AA0247400@netman.eng.auburn.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



On Apr 12 at 8:07
jim bell wrote:
>
>Are you sure they're not referring to 8 bits of data and a parity bit?  In 
>any case, please give the address to the list so that it can be checked out.
>
>
>

Come on, give it up already and admit you were wrong. At least 8 different
people have cited examples of machines that supported non 8bit bytes. Your
pride is getting the best of you.

If you mean 8 bits, you should really say Octets as has always been the
form of Internet RFC's where the distinction is important.

It may be standard today, but it was not always so..

--
____________________________________________________________________________
Doug Hughes					Engineering Network Services
System/Net Admin  				Auburn University
			doug@eng.auburn.edu
		Pro is to Con as progress is to congress





Thread